Used this lens on my recent visit to a car show. I also like this lens for candid portrait. The large DOF even at small aperture can be very useful on a FF - on the playroom picture with any other of my lens the ball in front of the face would have been blurred because it was shot at f3.2!

A recent acquisition for a trip to Norway to see the northern lights, it blows my 24-105 out of the water even more than I expected. I haven't made use of the wide aperture beyond the northern lights yet though.

You mentioned in flickr that it isn't very sharp. Was this due to focusing?All Canon lenses focus beyond infinite and when I take a night sky picture I try to focus on a bright star using the center point. Sometimes it works some not butlately I use my manual focus 21mm Zeiss. Infinite is infinite.However if focusing is correct and you see star trails this is normal if you shootwith a shutter open more seconds than stated in the following formula:

(500 to 600) / focal length. For a 24mm this is 20 to 30 sec tops. Beyond that the startrails are obvious.

Also if the trees look blurry it could probably be attributed to wind.

Anyway I meant to say that there is a probability that a little blurrying couldn't have been avoided. You still must feel lucky. I wish I were there but it is almost impossible.

Thanks Tron. The sharpness was basically human error. I may be being a bit hypercritical of my attempts, but I was trying to run before I could walk. I was trying to focus at the hyperfocal distance (10m @ 24mm and f/1.4) to get some of the foreground in focus as well, when I should have gone for the shot first, then started experimenting. One of the criticisms of modern lenses (and it is one area where Zeiss lenses have the edge), has been the depth of field scales. Basically, the scale on the 24mm f/1.4 MkII (and in fact most Canon WA lenses) goes from 3m to infinity, making it a guestimation that it is focused at the hyperfocal distance, unless you prefocus on something at 10m. I could have afforded to stop down a bit too (which I did later on, when the lights had subsided a bit).The ISO 800 shots were 15 secs, so it is likely that there would have been some star trails, while the ISO 1600 shots were at 8 secs (mostly f/1.4, but some later ones at f/1.6). The lights weren't exactly bright, but at least I saw them and got some usable shots. Incidentally, the two shots that I thought were teh best in terms of sharpness (both when the lights were subsiding), can't have been too bad, as they were accepted by Alamy, in a batch only containing the two shots and nothing else. Alamy typically scan two images from each upload to make sure the image quality is high enough.

Ive been dreaming about a 24 1.4 II lens for a looong time. The thing is i'd like to see the output from shooting weddings, any ideas on how to search that? I have done image searches on 24mm and Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 II L USM and such but only a small handfull of wedding picks that i found. I know its used a lot more just need some help. Also any opinions would be of great value!Thanks!

Ive been dreaming about a 24 1.4 II lens for a looong time. The thing is i'd like to see the output from shooting weddings, any ideas on how to search that? I have done image searches on 24mm and Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 II L USM and such but only a small handfull of wedding picks that i found. I know its used a lot more just need some help. Also any opinions would be of great value!Thanks!

You'll probably still need to pick and choose, but try this Google search.

Ive been dreaming about a 24 1.4 II lens for a looong time. The thing is i'd like to see the output from shooting weddings, any ideas on how to search that? I have done image searches on 24mm and Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 II L USM and such but only a small handfull of wedding picks that i found. I know its used a lot more just need some help. Also any opinions would be of great value!Thanks!

You'll probably still need to pick and choose, but try this Google search.